• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Milking It

K

kentraco

I had occasion to listen to WDBO all day Monday and was amazed to hear how far and how thin the news department stretched a simple story about a murder victim in Longwood.

I kept hearing the opener "We're learning new details about...", but what followed was invariably the same law enforcement sound bite or recorded report. The only actual "new" detail I heard was that the victim's identity had been established.

A body was found, and there was blood. It had been determined early in the morning that the suspect was known and a search was underway. That was the extent of the available information, but those few sparse details were the basis of breathless reporting from dawn to dusk.

"If it bleeds, it leads."
 
Regarding my previous post on the subject:

I guess what I heard yesterday was business as usual. All day today, it was "We're learning lots more about..." and "We're learning new details about..." the shooting by a man of his ex-wife. There was no "lots more", and no "new details" were forthcoming.

At ten o'clock, they "learned" the name of the shooter. Perhaps they had just come across the Orlando Sentinel web site, where I saw his name and picture at six-thirty this morning.

I appreciate the job that WDBO does, but these teaser tactics are very transparent and do nothing to enhance the image of the news department.
 
What more would you expect? Do you actually think people learn anything of the real world when they go to "college" to study radio? Are their "professors" real radio people who had a multi year or multi decade track record in major market radio or did they just play radio at the college station? When you go into the "newsroom" will you find a "broadcast style book" there? The highly "educated" college boys and girls who claim to be reporters never heard of such a thing.

Compare what you hear now to what you heard and participated in when radio was worth listening to. The comparison is very, very obvious...like a very athletic, vibrant, active man who is now in the final stages of cancer because he self inflicted himself with drinking and smoking!

RADIO...Circling The Drain!
 
All that may be true...but Dave Wahl's the person I heard both days, and he's no college kid.

He's been there since 1988.
 
just like the TV news does......'new information' 'breaking news' 'as we told you earlier........journalism is a joke, it doesn't exist anymore. it's style over substance. have a flashy jingle/or graphic to catch the attention of the listener/viewer and feed em the same crap they can hear or read anywhere......
 
Or how about these wonderful gems of highly skilled broadcast craftsmanship:

1. Running 911 calls when the recording is so UNINTELLIGIBLE you cannot make out a word!
2. Starting out a story with ridiculous exaggerated sound effects of rain.
3. Starting out any story WITHOUT a hard lead.
4. Doing an interview so completely unprepared the reporter says, "Talk about..." instead of asking specific questions.


Radio, circling the drain thanks to the "do it on the cheap" mentality of STUPID management and ownership!
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom